Some fans claim that Chewie was one of the Empire's slaves, that Han solo freed. I don't think that was in the movie canon, though. Did the movies say where the two met?

Silly question, but I have to ask after seeing all these inquiry threads you've started, but have you actually seen the movies? And if you have, were you not paying attention? I don't mean to be rude, but it just seems like a lot of unnecessary topics.

Is there a way to tell what is canon or not? That's what I find confusing. Did George Lucas have a statement or anything that proves it? I always find what is canon and what isn't canon to be very confusing. I remember him saying somewhere that the EU and the movies are separate universes.

How do we know it's canon to the movie storyline, though? Is there a way to tell? Is it canon, but we don't know it's the canon of another Star wars universe, kind of like the Sam raimi spiderman films and the amazing spiderman reboot, they're both canon, but different stories and universes. Or is it canon to the movie storyline too?

How do we know it's canon to the movie storyline, though? Is there a way to tell? Is it canon, but we don't know it's the canon of another Star wars universe, kind of like the Sam raimi spiderman films and the amazing spiderman reboot, they're both canon, but different stories and universes. Or is it canon to the movie storyline too?

Star Wars is not like that. Those films were made by two different film companies. Star Wars all falls under the veil of Lucasarts.

If star wars is not like the 2 spiderman film companies, then why did George Lucas make this statement? There are also a lot of contradictions between the EU and the movies to make them a part of the same universe. They seem more like the 2 spiderman series because of that. An example of a contradiction. In the movies, Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader is the chosen one who destroys the sith and brings the force into balance. But in the EU, there are dark-side users and Sith in post Return of the Jedi storylines. Quote Wookiepedia and George Lucas, "

"I don't read that stuff. I haven't read any of the novels. I don't know anything about that world. That's a different world than my world. But I do try to keep it consistent. The way I do it now is they have a Star Wars Encyclopedia. So if I come up with a name or something else, I look it up and see if it has already been used. When I said [other people] could make their own Star Wars stories, we decided that, like Star Trek, we would have two universes: My universe and then this other one. They try to make their universe as consistent with mine as possible, but obviously they get enthusiastic and want to go off in other directions."
".
And a second quote."However, it should be made clear that as far as George Lucas is concerned, the story ends withReturn of the Jediwith the Sith destroyed and the Force in balance. "But there's no story past Episode VI, there's just no story. It's a certain story about Anakin Skywalker and once Anakin Skywalker dies, that's kind of the end of the story."
".

Bringing balance to the force means no Sith or darksiders. Here's a quote from Wookiepedia to prove that.

Many fans incorrectly assume that balance refers to an equal mix of both light and dark side users. However, as George Lucas explains in the introductory documentary for the VHS version A New Hope, Special Edition, this is not the case:"The first film starts with the last age of the Republic, which is it's getting tired, it's old, it's getting corrupt.There's the rise of the Sith, who are becoming a force, and in the backdrop of this we have Anakin Skywalker, a young boy who is destined to be a significant player in bringing balance back to the Force and to the Republic...Then in the second film we get into more of that turmoil. It's the beginning of the Clone Wars, it's the beginning of the end of democracy in the Republic, sort of the beginning of the end of the Republic. And it's Anakin Skywalker beginning to deal with some of his more intense emotions of anger, hatred, sense of loss, possessiveness, jealousy, and the other things he has to cope with.And then we will get to the 3rd film where he is seduced to the dark side..Which brings us up to the films 4, 5, and 6, in which Anakin's offspring redeem him and allow him to fulfill the prophecy where he brings balance to the Force by doing away with the Sith and getting rid of evil in the universe..."

Anakin is the chosen one, but Palpatine was causing the imbalance, not the sith order. You should learn to take what Lucas says with a grain of salt. He says a lot of stuff and often changes his mind on things.

As far as cannonicity, the best way to look at it is, while George didn't let the EU change what he had planned with his movies, he can't cover every single detail about everything. So while the background info provided by the EU may not come directly from Lucas' mind, the author is approved to write this by a LFL representative.

As far as Han and Chewie's meeting, it is covered in the EU. Until Lucas comes along and changes this(which probably won't happen), its the best explanation of their meeting to go with.

This is incorrect. Balance means the light side and the dark side are in balance. All of one thing and none of the other is hardly balance.

Lord Tyranus said:

"Which brings us up to the films 4, 5, and 6, in which Anakin's offspring redeem him and allow him to fulfill the prophecy where he brings balance to the Force by doing away with the Sith and getting rid of evil in the universe..."

The problem with this statement is that it can't be taken literally. Whatever the post-ROTJ period is supposed to look like, it's not supposed to be an era where the sapient capacity for evil has been magically eliminated. So what does Lucas really mean? I think it's arguable that "evil" here should be taken to mean "the major dominant evil of Palpatine and the Empire".